Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Hi Pavel, Thanks very much for clarifying the way you're thinking about the process. It sounds like we're heading in the right direction together. :-) We'll get feedback from everyone at the WM Conference, and use it as inputs into the FDC Advisory Group meeting. I'm not sure that the FDC process itself needs a 'start from scratch' approach, when the entire mechanism was debated vigorously by the community two years ago, and we've been steadily implementing suggestions from everyone involved as we've been working on it since. After all, at the end of the day, it's a community-based *operational* mechanism for allocating funds to Wikimedia organisations, and the FDC and staff have always been open to improvement. And of course, there's always more we can do as we balance accountability with simplicity and ease. The more important and broader issue is not operational, it's strategic - and there I agree with you: there's a larger conversation to be had around the goals of the movement and how we achieve them. Like Dariusz said, though, that's a conversation that should include a wide cross-section of our community. I'm happy to work with you on planning an effective session at both WM Conference and during the FDC Advisory Group. And I look forward to having a strategy track at Wikimania this year that can incorporate these broader questions that matter to all of us. Warmly, Anasuya On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Pavel Richter pavel.rich...@wikimedia.dewrote: Dear Anasuya, thank you for your mail and the very good points you are raising in it. I would like to address one point in particular, my idea of reworking the FDC process at the Wikimedia Conference in April. My intention is not to hijack the timetable of the FDC, or to circumvent established channels. I simply believe that, if you face a rather complicated process such as the FDC, it can be very helpful to rethink the whole idea from scratch. So instead of asking: How can we improve the current process, we would start from: What goals do we want to reach, which strengths of our movement can we use for this, and which values and principles should guide us. At the end, we would not have a new or improved FDC process, but a way forward to reach our goals. This way may or may not look like the current FDC, but in any case it can be used as an inspiration when it comes to review (and maybe change) the FDC process. So please do not see our suggestion to discuss this at the Wikimedia Conference as a counter-proposal to the original timeframe. As ED and as a member of the FDC AG, I fully support the process that you outlined in your mail, and I am very confident that it will lead to fruitfull discussions and ultimatly to a good recommendation. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel 2014/1/16 Anasuya Sengupta asengu...@wikimedia.org Hi Pavel, Thanks very much for the thoughtful feedback from WMDE on the FDC. We certainly want to be (and hope we are) wiki in nature: a work in progress, with continued room for improvement. So I think the FDC, the FDC Advisory Group (of which you are a member, of course), the Board and the staff will all be considering these comments as we move forward. I want to be equally thoughtful of the fact that we already have a number of processes in place that are part of the FDC Framework - and that the FDC and staff have expanded upon in the past year and a half - and that are designed to incorporate feedback of this kind. I'm also conscious that the FDC will be in the middle of reviewing Round 2 applications in April, and it would be difficult on them - and the applicants - if we were to do an intensive process of consultation with all 9 members and 2 Board representatives at the time. Most significantly, we have a meeting with the FDC Advisory Group (FDC AG) planned, as you know, for end May, in which we are scheduling a time to overlap with the FDC members, so that feedback in both directions can then be incorporated into the FDC Advisory Group's recommendations to the WMF ED and Board as per the FDC Framework.[1] As a reminder, the FDC AG was meant to have had a meeting in March this year, to recommend the continuance of the FDC or not. On consultation with the AG late last year, we decided to move this meeting to May, so that it would be at the end of two years and four rounds of the FDC, and could have useful input from both FDC members and all participants. According to the Framework, this counsel from the AG will then feed into the WMF ED's recommendation to the Board, on the FDC's continued existence and its form (due, according to the Framework, roughly in mid-August this year). The current members of the AG are Richard Ames/Ariconte, Ting Chen (former member of WMF Board), Jan-Bart de Vreede (WMF Board), Thomas d'Souza
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Hoi, I take it that the Hungarian chapter takes part in this? I know other chapters do as well.. Thanks, GerardM On 17 January 2014 18:17, Balázs Viczián balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.huwrote: My five cents here would be that how about considering longer time frames for grants, like 2-3-5 years (I was too tired to understandably explain this yesterday to Anasuya) Here in Hungary individuals can offer 1% of their income tax to nonprofit organizations (these are accounted and transferred to the nonprofits by the state) These funds must be spent within 3 years (so not 1 but 3) from their reception (unused funds has to be transferred back at the end of the 3rd year). Cheers, Vince *Balazs Viczian* Executive Vice President *Wikimédia Magyarország Egyesület* Tel: +36 70 633 6372 Mail: balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu Web: www.wikimedia.hu Blog: Magyar Wikipédia Magazin http://huwiki.blogspot.hu Facebook: Magyar Wikipédia https://www.facebook.com/hu.wikipedia 2014/1/17 Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se While I believe the FDC process by now is well understood and communicated, I feel the understanding of the actual group, FDC and the deliberation we perform is less well understood (and communicated) And if WMDE feedback will be elaborated upon, I think it will be of value understanding FDC and the deliberation process and I have therefor put down a short description of this on the talkpage, based on my own experience as one of its member (1) I see very much in this feedback related to the prerequisites to the FDC, not how we have implemented our inputs into recommendations. Also I think some of the wanted more detailed feedback and interaction with the FDC as a group is very hard to implement considering how our deliberation process for now is set up . But feedback is always a good thing and hopefully this feedback can be processed to improve the process and give all involved a happier feeling of the funds dissemination in the future. Anders (1) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/FDC_ portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_ process#FDC_as_a_group Pavel Richter skrev 2014-01-15 17:36: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/ Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
My five cents here would be that how about considering longer time frames for grants, like 2-3-5 years (I was too tired to understandably explain this yesterday to Anasuya) Here in Hungary individuals can offer 1% of their income tax to nonprofit organizations (these are accounted and transferred to the nonprofits by the state) These funds must be spent within 3 years (so not 1 but 3) from their reception (unused funds has to be transferred back at the end of the 3rd year). Cheers, Vince *Balazs Viczian* Executive Vice President *Wikimédia Magyarország Egyesület* Tel: +36 70 633 6372 Mail: balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu Web: www.wikimedia.hu Blog: Magyar Wikipédia Magazinhttp://huwiki.blogspot.hu Facebook: Magyar Wikipédia https://www.facebook.com/hu.wikipedia 2014/1/17 Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se While I believe the FDC process by now is well understood and communicated, I feel the understanding of the actual group, FDC and the deliberation we perform is less well understood (and communicated) And if WMDE feedback will be elaborated upon, I think it will be of value understanding FDC and the deliberation process and I have therefor put down a short description of this on the talkpage, based on my own experience as one of its member (1) I see very much in this feedback related to the prerequisites to the FDC, not how we have implemented our inputs into recommendations. Also I think some of the wanted more detailed feedback and interaction with the FDC as a group is very hard to implement considering how our deliberation process for now is set up . But feedback is always a good thing and hopefully this feedback can be processed to improve the process and give all involved a happier feeling of the funds dissemination in the future. Anders (1) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/FDC_ portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_ process#FDC_as_a_group Pavel Richter skrev 2014-01-15 17:36: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/ Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Dear Anasuya, thank you for your mail and the very good points you are raising in it. I would like to address one point in particular, my idea of reworking the FDC process at the Wikimedia Conference in April. My intention is not to hijack the timetable of the FDC, or to circumvent established channels. I simply believe that, if you face a rather complicated process such as the FDC, it can be very helpful to rethink the whole idea from scratch. So instead of asking: How can we improve the current process, we would start from: What goals do we want to reach, which strengths of our movement can we use for this, and which values and principles should guide us. At the end, we would not have a new or improved FDC process, but a way forward to reach our goals. This way may or may not look like the current FDC, but in any case it can be used as an inspiration when it comes to review (and maybe change) the FDC process. So please do not see our suggestion to discuss this at the Wikimedia Conference as a counter-proposal to the original timeframe. As ED and as a member of the FDC AG, I fully support the process that you outlined in your mail, and I am very confident that it will lead to fruitfull discussions and ultimatly to a good recommendation. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel 2014/1/16 Anasuya Sengupta asengu...@wikimedia.org Hi Pavel, Thanks very much for the thoughtful feedback from WMDE on the FDC. We certainly want to be (and hope we are) wiki in nature: a work in progress, with continued room for improvement. So I think the FDC, the FDC Advisory Group (of which you are a member, of course), the Board and the staff will all be considering these comments as we move forward. I want to be equally thoughtful of the fact that we already have a number of processes in place that are part of the FDC Framework - and that the FDC and staff have expanded upon in the past year and a half - and that are designed to incorporate feedback of this kind. I'm also conscious that the FDC will be in the middle of reviewing Round 2 applications in April, and it would be difficult on them - and the applicants - if we were to do an intensive process of consultation with all 9 members and 2 Board representatives at the time. Most significantly, we have a meeting with the FDC Advisory Group (FDC AG) planned, as you know, for end May, in which we are scheduling a time to overlap with the FDC members, so that feedback in both directions can then be incorporated into the FDC Advisory Group's recommendations to the WMF ED and Board as per the FDC Framework.[1] As a reminder, the FDC AG was meant to have had a meeting in March this year, to recommend the continuance of the FDC or not. On consultation with the AG late last year, we decided to move this meeting to May, so that it would be at the end of two years and four rounds of the FDC, and could have useful input from both FDC members and all participants. According to the Framework, this counsel from the AG will then feed into the WMF ED's recommendation to the Board, on the FDC's continued existence and its form (due, according to the Framework, roughly in mid-August this year). The current members of the AG are Richard Ames/Ariconte, Ting Chen (former member of WMF Board), Jan-Bart de Vreede (WMF Board), Thomas d'Souza Buckup/TSB, Peter Ekman/Smallbones, Sue Gardner (WMF ED), Crystal Hayling (Philanthropy Advisor), Christophe Henner (WMFR), Kathy Reich (Packard Foundation), Pavel Richter (WMDE), Osmar Valdebenito (WMAR) and Stu West (WMF Board).[2] Since I replaced Barry Newstead, I will host and facilitate this meeting as he did the original FDC Advisory Group, with support from a small sub-committee of the AG. I had originally planned to ask this sub-committee of the FDC AG if they would be willing to lead an on-wiki conversation post the WM Conference that would feed into the meeting in May, but this conversation pre-empts that, somewhat, so here would be my suggestion for a practical and constructive way to move forward: * We have a full and frank conversation at the Wikimedia Conference - as we did last year - with everyone interested, on the FDC process and constructive suggestions for improvements. We do this with two FDC members and staff present, and take detailed notes. * This feedback will then be shared with the FDC Advisory Group when it meets in May. We are planning to have the FDC members overlap with the FDC AG for half a day so that there is collective sharing, after which the AG will consider all the different inputs that we have collected so far: feedback from the many F2F meetings, including site visits; the anonymised surveys we have conducted after every round of the FDC recommendations; the ongoing progress reports and program evaluations; and the many on-wiki/email/phone/skype/IRC conversations we have
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
While I believe the FDC process by now is well understood and communicated, I feel the understanding of the actual group, FDC and the deliberation we perform is less well understood (and communicated) And if WMDE feedback will be elaborated upon, I think it will be of value understanding FDC and the deliberation process and I have therefor put down a short description of this on the talkpage, based on my own experience as one of its member (1) I see very much in this feedback related to the prerequisites to the FDC, not how we have implemented our inputs into recommendations. Also I think some of the wanted more detailed feedback and interaction with the FDC as a group is very hard to implement considering how our deliberation process for now is set up . But feedback is always a good thing and hopefully this feedback can be processed to improve the process and give all involved a happier feeling of the funds dissemination in the future. Anders (1) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process#FDC_as_a_group Pavel Richter skrev 2014-01-15 17:36: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Thank you Pavel and WMDE board, this is indeed a great constructive feedback and I strongly agree with most of the your arguments and concerns. Itzik WMIL On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Pavel Richter pavel.rich...@wikimedia.dewrote: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
thanks indeed! I agree with many of the comments (and yes, I don't like bureaucracy neither, I also am very much in favor of moving towards a collaborative and trusting process, although the way you phrased it sounds as if you've assumed we, at the FDC, are against it :) I think that beyond high-level philosophical comments there needs to be an actual down-to-earth discussion about details. There is a need for constructive proposals on what can be done differently and how, rather than what we don't like. This conversation should be done collaboratively, I think. I do not believe that the upcoming chapters conference is the best possible venue for such a discussion. First, most of the FDC members will not be there, and I think that our presence could be useful. Second, the whole FDC cycle has not finished yet (and it will finish in May). Finally, much more movement activists will be present at Wikimania. That's why I think that 1-2 days before or after Wikimania would be the best time to have an intensive, constructive session on the FDC model. Also, please note that there is an FDC review process ongoing (there is a community driven FDC-advisory group, etc.). Perhaps a good first step would be to coordinate this, mocking mode on rather than schedule WMDE-driven redesign /mocking mode off. In any case, I'm glad the conversation is starting, and I think it would be good to actually schedule some time for a workshop about this. My suggestion is before or after Wikimania, as it is by far the easiest timing for many, including those who do not receive chapter support to attend. best, dariusz pundit On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: Thank you Pavel and WMDE board, this is indeed a great constructive feedback and I strongly agree with most of the your arguments and concerns. Itzik WMIL On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Pavel Richter pavel.rich...@wikimedia.dewrote: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- __ dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak profesor zarządzania kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego i centrum badawczego CROW Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Thanks to WMDE for the thoughtful and very interesting feedback to the FDC. As an observer but not a participant, I found it very helpful in organizing and restating the criticism we've all read about the FDC process. The statement is highly constructive, and I understand why it doesn't get into great detail about proposed changes (that would detract from the overview nature of the statement). The only off note was the declaration that WMDE plans to drive a reworking of the FDC process at a time and place of its choosing, inviting movement entities but not specifically the WMF. It needs to be recalled that the funds available, and the primary channel for gathering those funds, belong to the WMF and are under the sole final authority of the WMF's Board. Dariusz' suggestion for Wikimania makes sense; so would a separate convention for stakeholders organized by the FDC/WMF. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Thanks Pavel for sharing this. I think a bigger conversation will be on-going on Meta and in general on where to continue it in the real world. It might be useful to keep in mind that the movement has already invested and committed to bringing all chapters (and possibly thorgs) to the Wikimedia Conference [the potential funded entities] - it would be a marginal increase in cost to bring 10 more members of the FDC (and anyone else who is required); whereas having a meeting before or after Wikimania could lead to increased costs to every single participant and could possibly leave out chapters and stakeholders who cannot afford to send someone to Wikimania or to stay the extra days. Either way, if we want to have an inclusive in-person consultation, we have to invest in it - Wikimania might not be the smallest possible marginal investment and without right policies in place could not be the ideal to ensure fair participation (where all stakeholders are present, and individual volunteers are not inconvenienced by having to pay from their personal pockets for either food, travel or accommodation just to participate). Best regards, Bence On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.plwrote: thanks indeed! I agree with many of the comments (and yes, I don't like bureaucracy neither, I also am very much in favor of moving towards a collaborative and trusting process, although the way you phrased it sounds as if you've assumed we, at the FDC, are against it :) I think that beyond high-level philosophical comments there needs to be an actual down-to-earth discussion about details. There is a need for constructive proposals on what can be done differently and how, rather than what we don't like. This conversation should be done collaboratively, I think. I do not believe that the upcoming chapters conference is the best possible venue for such a discussion. First, most of the FDC members will not be there, and I think that our presence could be useful. Second, the whole FDC cycle has not finished yet (and it will finish in May). Finally, much more movement activists will be present at Wikimania. That's why I think that 1-2 days before or after Wikimania would be the best time to have an intensive, constructive session on the FDC model. Also, please note that there is an FDC review process ongoing (there is a community driven FDC-advisory group, etc.). Perhaps a good first step would be to coordinate this, mocking mode on rather than schedule WMDE-driven redesign /mocking mode off. In any case, I'm glad the conversation is starting, and I think it would be good to actually schedule some time for a workshop about this. My suggestion is before or after Wikimania, as it is by far the easiest timing for many, including those who do not receive chapter support to attend. best, dariusz pundit On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: Thank you Pavel and WMDE board, this is indeed a great constructive feedback and I strongly agree with most of the your arguments and concerns. Itzik WMIL On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Pavel Richter pavel.rich...@wikimedia.dewrote: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- __ dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak profesor zarządzania kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego i centrum badawczego CROW Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
hi Bence, I think that a discussion about the movement sources should be more open to people from outside of chapters, too and their input may nevertheless be valuable. Also, my wild guess is that Wikimania will attract many more activists of the movement than the chapter conference anyway (especially from outside Europe). The specific workshop can possibly be even squeezed in during Wikimania, although organizing it before/after it would likely allow to go into more details, and the increase in costs would be just by one night (and some of us could stay on our own, as I will if I don't get WMF coverage). Finally, I believe it makes much more sense to gather comments and feedback on redesigning the FDC process after Round 2 is finished (in May). best, dariusz On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Pavel for sharing this. I think a bigger conversation will be on-going on Meta and in general on where to continue it in the real world. It might be useful to keep in mind that the movement has already invested and committed to bringing all chapters (and possibly thorgs) to the Wikimedia Conference [the potential funded entities] - it would be a marginal increase in cost to bring 10 more members of the FDC (and anyone else who is required); whereas having a meeting before or after Wikimania could lead to increased costs to every single participant and could possibly leave out chapters and stakeholders who cannot afford to send someone to Wikimania or to stay the extra days. Either way, if we want to have an inclusive in-person consultation, we have to invest in it - Wikimania might not be the smallest possible marginal investment and without right policies in place could not be the ideal to ensure fair participation (where all stakeholders are present, and individual volunteers are not inconvenienced by having to pay from their personal pockets for either food, travel or accommodation just to participate). Best regards, Bence On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.plwrote: thanks indeed! I agree with many of the comments (and yes, I don't like bureaucracy neither, I also am very much in favor of moving towards a collaborative and trusting process, although the way you phrased it sounds as if you've assumed we, at the FDC, are against it :) I think that beyond high-level philosophical comments there needs to be an actual down-to-earth discussion about details. There is a need for constructive proposals on what can be done differently and how, rather than what we don't like. This conversation should be done collaboratively, I think. I do not believe that the upcoming chapters conference is the best possible venue for such a discussion. First, most of the FDC members will not be there, and I think that our presence could be useful. Second, the whole FDC cycle has not finished yet (and it will finish in May). Finally, much more movement activists will be present at Wikimania. That's why I think that 1-2 days before or after Wikimania would be the best time to have an intensive, constructive session on the FDC model. Also, please note that there is an FDC review process ongoing (there is a community driven FDC-advisory group, etc.). Perhaps a good first step would be to coordinate this, mocking mode on rather than schedule WMDE-driven redesign /mocking mode off. In any case, I'm glad the conversation is starting, and I think it would be good to actually schedule some time for a workshop about this. My suggestion is before or after Wikimania, as it is by far the easiest timing for many, including those who do not receive chapter support to attend. best, dariusz pundit On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Itzik Edri it...@infra.co.il wrote: Thank you Pavel and WMDE board, this is indeed a great constructive feedback and I strongly agree with most of the your arguments and concerns. Itzik WMIL On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:36 PM, Pavel Richter pavel.rich...@wikimedia.dewrote: Hello everybody, I have just posted an extensive feedback from WMDE on the FDC process here on meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/Comments/Extensive_feedback_from_WMDE_to_the_FDC_process The statement was drafted by WMDE's Supervisory Board and myself. We are very much looking forward to a discussion and I would like to encourage everybody to share their thoughts. At the same it would be great if we could keep the discussion on meta so that we have everything in one place. All the Best, Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Pavel Richter Vorstand Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tel.: +49 - 30 - 219 158 260 Twitter: @pavel ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ,
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Those are all concerns I understand, and i am not in the mood to argue this to win. Either result would be fine with me after a well considered decision. i merely put forward considerations of people (should all possible funded entities be present - they are not guaranteed presence at one of the two events) and cost (should volunteers, including volunteers of the FDC and chapters, as well as independent activists, use their own money to discuss how the movement should divide its existing money - at the current level, I do not think it would be fair, at least it would not lead to an equitable situation if certain volunteers and staffers are funded while others aren't). As for timing and outside participation, this is a judgment call to make. You have to see if the FDC has the spare capacity to work on the current round while discussing the future. Especially, as predictability would normally require that changes be introduced with a delay so as not to disrupt the current round and the planning for the upcoming one. You also have to make an estimate, how many knowledgeable outside participants are likely to be there and whether they (like the FDC advisory group and participants of the Meta discussions) could be invited to either Wikimania, WMCON or a separate workshop. In all likelihood, I see two or more discussions and two overlapping groups of participants. One of them are the technicalities of the FDC process, where the people most likely to participate and be knowledgeable are the FDC and the current and future applicants. There is also a wider discussion of movement wide goals and strategy which should not happen in any venue that excludes the wider movement, but could still benefit from the input of in-person meetings of experts and movement activists at numerous venues. These are just ideas for consideration. Best regards, Bence On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 8:03 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.plwrote: hi Bence, I think that a discussion about the movement sources should be more open to people from outside of chapters, too and their input may nevertheless be valuable. Also, my wild guess is that Wikimania will attract many more activists of the movement than the chapter conference anyway (especially from outside Europe). The specific workshop can possibly be even squeezed in during Wikimania, although organizing it before/after it would likely allow to go into more details, and the increase in costs would be just by one night (and some of us could stay on our own, as I will if I don't get WMF coverage). Finally, I believe it makes much more sense to gather comments and feedback on redesigning the FDC process after Round 2 is finished (in May). best, dariusz On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Pavel for sharing this. I think a bigger conversation will be on-going on Meta and in general on where to continue it in the real world. It might be useful to keep in mind that the movement has already invested and committed to bringing all chapters (and possibly thorgs) to the Wikimedia Conference [the potential funded entities] - it would be a marginal increase in cost to bring 10 more members of the FDC (and anyone else who is required); whereas having a meeting before or after Wikimania could lead to increased costs to every single participant and could possibly leave out chapters and stakeholders who cannot afford to send someone to Wikimania or to stay the extra days. Either way, if we want to have an inclusive in-person consultation, we have to invest in it - Wikimania might not be the smallest possible marginal investment and without right policies in place could not be the ideal to ensure fair participation (where all stakeholders are present, and individual volunteers are not inconvenienced by having to pay from their personal pockets for either food, travel or accommodation just to participate). Best regards, Bence On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.plwrote: thanks indeed! I agree with many of the comments (and yes, I don't like bureaucracy neither, I also am very much in favor of moving towards a collaborative and trusting process, although the way you phrased it sounds as if you've assumed we, at the FDC, are against it :) I think that beyond high-level philosophical comments there needs to be an actual down-to-earth discussion about details. There is a need for constructive proposals on what can be done differently and how, rather than what we don't like. This conversation should be done collaboratively, I think. I do not believe that the upcoming chapters conference is the best possible venue for such a discussion. First, most of the FDC members will not be there, and I think that our presence could be useful. Second, the whole FDC cycle has not finished yet (and it will finish in May). Finally, much more movement activists will be present at
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Extensive feedback from WMDE to the FDC process
Hi Pavel, Thanks very much for the thoughtful feedback from WMDE on the FDC. We certainly want to be (and hope we are) wiki in nature: a work in progress, with continued room for improvement. So I think the FDC, the FDC Advisory Group (of which you are a member, of course), the Board and the staff will all be considering these comments as we move forward. I want to be equally thoughtful of the fact that we already have a number of processes in place that are part of the FDC Framework - and that the FDC and staff have expanded upon in the past year and a half - and that are designed to incorporate feedback of this kind. I'm also conscious that the FDC will be in the middle of reviewing Round 2 applications in April, and it would be difficult on them - and the applicants - if we were to do an intensive process of consultation with all 9 members and 2 Board representatives at the time. Most significantly, we have a meeting with the FDC Advisory Group (FDC AG) planned, as you know, for end May, in which we are scheduling a time to overlap with the FDC members, so that feedback in both directions can then be incorporated into the FDC Advisory Group's recommendations to the WMF ED and Board as per the FDC Framework.[1] As a reminder, the FDC AG was meant to have had a meeting in March this year, to recommend the continuance of the FDC or not. On consultation with the AG late last year, we decided to move this meeting to May, so that it would be at the end of two years and four rounds of the FDC, and could have useful input from both FDC members and all participants. According to the Framework, this counsel from the AG will then feed into the WMF ED's recommendation to the Board, on the FDC's continued existence and its form (due, according to the Framework, roughly in mid-August this year). The current members of the AG are Richard Ames/Ariconte, Ting Chen (former member of WMF Board), Jan-Bart de Vreede (WMF Board), Thomas d'Souza Buckup/TSB, Peter Ekman/Smallbones, Sue Gardner (WMF ED), Crystal Hayling (Philanthropy Advisor), Christophe Henner (WMFR), Kathy Reich (Packard Foundation), Pavel Richter (WMDE), Osmar Valdebenito (WMAR) and Stu West (WMF Board).[2] Since I replaced Barry Newstead, I will host and facilitate this meeting as he did the original FDC Advisory Group, with support from a small sub-committee of the AG. I had originally planned to ask this sub-committee of the FDC AG if they would be willing to lead an on-wiki conversation post the WM Conference that would feed into the meeting in May, but this conversation pre-empts that, somewhat, so here would be my suggestion for a practical and constructive way to move forward: * We have a full and frank conversation at the Wikimedia Conference - as we did last year - with everyone interested, on the FDC process and constructive suggestions for improvements. We do this with two FDC members and staff present, and take detailed notes. * This feedback will then be shared with the FDC Advisory Group when it meets in May. We are planning to have the FDC members overlap with the FDC AG for half a day so that there is collective sharing, after which the AG will consider all the different inputs that we have collected so far: feedback from the many F2F meetings, including site visits; the anonymised surveys we have conducted after every round of the FDC recommendations; the ongoing progress reports and program evaluations; and the many on-wiki/email/phone/skype/IRC conversations we have had with each organisation throughout the FDC process. All of these suggestions could then usefully feed into the FDC Advisory Group's recommendation to the WMF ED and Board, and in time for shaping the next year of the FDC process. I'm hoping that the AG will be able to share its recommendations publicly, soon after its meeting, which can then continue this conversation much more constructively on-wiki. It's worth all of us remembering that the FDC process - supporting the annual plans of Wikimedia organisations - is ultimately meant to have impact on our online Wikimedia projects. We are all shared stewards of movement resources, and having the contributions and thinking of different community members is therefore critical. I would rather not turn to Wikimania as the only place to have this conversation however, instead seeing it as the space at which we can perhaps present the recommendations of the Advisory Group, and include a broader conversation about the movement's goals and how all Wikimedia organisations can support achieving those goals better. I'd be glad to hear your thoughts on this, both as WMDE ED and as a member of the FDC Advisory Group. Warmly, Anasuya [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/Framework_for_the_Creation_and_Initial_Operation_of_the_FDC#Assessment_and_continuous_improvement_of_the_funds_dissemination_process [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Funds_Dissemination_Committee/FDC_Advisory_Group On Wed, Jan
